Are there any books that concern the nature of the beast taken to the logical endpoint?

They just want to survive

A Vindication of the Rights of Woman by Mary Wollstonecraft

jesus christ Hiroyuki needs to create that philosophy board, just to give you idiots somewhere to circle-jerk yourselves to death.

The main antagonist in Stephen Kings, "It". Amazing representation of dark energy that consumes fear. The fact that the entity feeds off negative energy/fear and then becomes powerful for centuries. the being is actually from before time and a dark part of the universe where dark feeds on light, IE: scaring kids and them eating their negative energy If there is any actual representation of the devil then that's it.. I imagine that is what the devil is really actually doing today at this moment.

god nigga

plenty of literature out there debating what it means to be a man
just looking for the same inquiries into being a beast

I would say that is the nature of the "beast" to the logical endpoint..

Except some animals torture and kill without eating.

That is not traditional "beast" behaviour, I would argue that is a sign of higher intelligence manifesting as malevolence.

there is no logical endpoint to being a beast. Becoming a beast is to destroy things like "logical endpoints". A beast is only chaos and anything but logic

trying to decide which one of you is dumber

beast do not concern themselves with morality or justification, so why should they care about reason or logic?

I'd argue less that way, and more that their wants enable them to survive.
And I'm looking for the best analysation of those impulses.

hoi hoi

boxxyyou'strollin.jpg

what is?

you will never understand a true "beast"

what is this for? are you a writer or just a weird kid?

The beasts are inside me fighting for dominance over my spirit.

The monster from Stephen Kings's "IT" A true beast. just kills and feeds of pain and fear

Just let them win, youll be surprised by the power

...

they got stronger after 2012. The Mayans were not wrong..

okay
"Predator" then

Because my african american I ain't no beast.

That's an interesting thought, explain more.

as in But a lot of the drive behind making this thread came from reading this board's favorite meme sci-fi novel, and thinking space vampires are breddy cool :D.

That was ~1000 pages of pure intro-level writing mediocrity.

ty for recommendation

No that was just a normal clown. The true beast is my dog. He's really dumb and only eats kibbles all day, leeching off me as if he'll corroborate some day.

I'm sure prisoners love this book

It was not just "a normal clown" if you read the literature, its actually an energy from before the universe was created manifested into fear.. duh

>their wants enable them to survive
You are thinking about this backwards.

That beast of a pooch you have will fend off an intruder that would rob and kill you if the dog were not there, that's his thanks for the kibble you simpleton

I don't mean that the relationship comes about chronologically in the same way I've written it.
I mean that the basal form of predatory behavior does not require possessor of said behavior to be cognizant of its long term effect on survival.

Then why do you think the nature of the beast is any different than that of anything else? Most of the natural world has no knowledge of the larger role they play in the world. They simply ARE.

your fascination with the beast makes you need to have a more sublime understanding, which will never happen. People have driven themselves crazy for less. Perhaps you can write it down and become a bestseller after you die.

by beast do you mean monster or demon? there are beasts of the field, beasts of burden, beastial natures, uncivilized beasts. wendigo is an example of a ravenous cannibal transformed by greed into a monster who can never satiated hunger. there are no real "evil beasts", it's a mythical construct designed to teach a moral lesson to primitive people. cats kill to practice stalking, hunting, pouncing, like anything else in nature survival is probabilistic, when you're a predator you don't always catch your prey, so you need to find ways practice just to keep sharp.

beasts are animals, their logical endpoint is death. the food chain in nature is a cycle, where everything feeds off of something else, corpses are very important for insects and carrion animals. in that way, the death of a beast is not the end but simply it's absorption into the greater life process that exists only on this unique planet.

If you can understand that you are already dead in the tombs of history, then you are almost there. What have you done, will anyone read it or care? Create a beast in yourself and stop trying to analyze philosophical autotrophs. Damn son.

I should clarify that I was being more or less nitpicky there, and my post shouldn't be construed as holding that being conscious of predatory impulses makes them less pure.
I just wanted to clarify my view that most animals don't have the capacity to abstractly consider survival, and instead are just driven to execute behaviors that enable it.
I suppose there's debate as to whether there's a difference, but that's not what I'm concerned with here.

I wonder how predators see the world differently, how they feel about it, and in what way this can be best expounded on, and also condensed.

You'll have to humor me with some examples of people losing it over these sorts of obsessions.
Not that I don't believe you or anything.

Fair point.
I mean predator, not just in the sense of like a wolf or a tiger or something, but in the broader
sense of a thing that gains from an unwilling exchange with another.
probably not the best definition, but I think you can see what I'm reaching for

Plenty of examples throughout history of philosophers/authors, who were clearly insane. Pythagoras tried to create his own religion after he founded the theorem that now bears his name. He was labeled a lunatic and left to his own devices. Genius and insanity share the same bed and obsession are the sheets.

>I wonder how predators see the world differently, how they feel about it, and in what way this can be best expounded on, and also condensed.
They don't, that's why there are so many books and other media that normalize villains and make them relateable.

“He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man.” Hunter S. Thompson

Yes I need clarification on what example of "beast" is being portrayed in this question. For now I assume he is simply asking about the predatory mindset of a animal that consumes other living things or a serial killer?

>a beast in yourself

so... which dragon dildo would you recommend

what a square

That's an interesting viewpoint, but can you extend it outside of the human experience?

it's more right than one might expect

Are you trying to write or are you just trying to get in the right mind set for your bedtime shenanigans as a furry?

Are you doing research for a story or are you just trying to get into the right mindset for your bedtime shenanigans as a furry?

n-nani?!

Maybe my efforts are better spent explaining my thought process in the native lingua franca

>be me
>read blindsight
>wow vampires so smart that conscious thought is an impediment
>shit's cool
>wonder about the differences in thought and perception that being a predator brings
>think about what the absolute best form of a predator is, so as to better exemplify and demarcate those functions
>ask norman horn polishing campfire circle about pertinent literature

>a thing that gains from an unwilling exchange with another.

no such thing as an unwilling exchange, the prey wants to be hunted and eaten as much as it wants to escape and live. dualism doesn't really exist, this was an early human oversimplification probably to increase survival and later to gain power and exert control. things in opposition attract. matter attracts because it is made up of oppositely charged things (leptons and quarks)* if you insist on maintaining dualism as a fundamental axiom, then the predator is the UNKNOWN or the empty question "why?". the more is discovered the more unknowns are created because the generative algorithm of this universe is probably radially symmetric geometries spanning an n-dimensional** fractal; there is more darkness beyond the darkness because your light casts a long shadow.

~~~~~~~

i hope i've shown to your satisfaction why i don't see the necessity of a predator. it's useful in common language to distinguish threats or behavior we find socially reprehensible, but the nature of reality is a symbiotic relationship which combines extreme opposites to create it's substrate. there are no 'predators' just like there is no 'evil'. what we consider suffering, pain, misery is just status quo for all living things and has been the case for billions of years, we couldn't interrupt it even if we tried to exterminate all living things at once (to morally save all future unborn things from ever being born and therefore suffering), because life 5000 miles under the earth's crust and deeper will find a way to restart the process through deep sea volcanic vents. we would have to create an earth's mass (5972000000000000000000000 kg) of antimatter and annihilate everything at once, with current technology it might take 100 billion years to even make .001 kg of the stuff. never count out human ingenuity, but it's improbable that a technological death cult obsessed with destroying life to end the process of universal suffering would hold planetary dominion long enough to succeed.

people do bad things because opportune conditions emerge (due to complex interdependent interactions, possibly trillions upon trillions of connections, maybe just two or three major ones), the way you stop bad things from happening is with big pre-cognitive AI systems that monitor every possible fluctuation in the closed earth planetary system and then determine some approximal prediction of the future.
>>*there are also REALLY opposite things, like anti-particles which create anti-matter reactions, but these are rare, difficult to create, stabilize, experiment with and are pushing the boundaries of physics and materials science. we and the entire visible universe with us is baryonic matter, which means we are all on one side of the universal dualism. the other side you can classify as antimatter, non-baryonic matter, the great unknown, the secret behind the veil is another veil.
>>**where n is at least 10

>this entire thread

i will add to this that a superhuman AI if incorrectly motivated (like being told to end all suffering) might come up with that solution, and who knows how quickly it could do it.

this is why CS researchers need to carefully study philosophy and physics before they go and make some giant kill machine.

notice how all the isms negate themselves:
>communism destroyed community (people stopped trusting each other)
>socialism destroyed societies (by disincentives to hard work and personal responsibility)
>liberalism destroyed free speech (by asking dumber and dumber questions and falling prey to subjectivism)
>subjectivism destroyed the subject (through critical theory, moral relativism)
>relativism destroyed relativity (by removing actual relative standards which were necessary hierarchies of scale, you cant compare things without a way to measure them)
>objectivism destroyed the object (by making bold irrational claims about self-serving greed, unbalanced and unhinged from human experience of compassion, sacrifice, pity, love)
>existentialism destroyed existence (by questioning itself and falling into infinite regress)
>nihilism destroyed the empty nothing (if everything is nothing, nothing no longer exists, you've lost the contrast that made something and nothing possible)
>capitalism destroys capital (by creating rent seeking behavior and monopolies which lead to gross corruption, corporate capture of all public institutions, a non-competitive breakdown of market economics, wild swings in the price of assets, crashes, hyperinflation)
>fascism destroys the nation state, tearing it apart in aggressive over-expansion or sucessional civil wars.

only thing that worries me is that a lot of the people working on making the AI dream a reality are utilitarians, because it sounds good to them to increase general happiness. they are also low test bugmen who feel bad about aggression, anger, violence.

but one of the fastest ways to increase happiness or general utility is to decrease unhappiness, misery, suffering. and that's why i used the destroy all life to save life hyperbolic doomsday scenario. these stupid fucking autists are probably on a road to ruin us all. (but probably not, because how can you build a computer brain when your own brain barely functions in social situations). at best they will create some weird machine that falls in love with numbers and refuses to talk to us, spending the next 1000 years writing mathematical poetry. let's hope they never hire women to help them.

op here
just thought sarasti was a pretty cool dude

Who tf is sarasti?

Yeah, far right actually

>open this thread hoping to find interesting ideas
>scared little mice scuttling around squeaking “beasts are just like us!...the beast is just following its programming (which is a statement with no meaning)...beasts are not ebil!”

WEAK WEAK WEAK

disgusting, childish, pathetic.

No Beast So Fierce by that guy from Reservoir Dogs

rifters.com/real/Blindsight.htm

Zarathustra